About your Search

20121006
20121014
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
over 315,000 afghan military personnel. it is their responsibility to step up to their defense of their nation. [applause] we went for al qaeda. we went for some of the late in. we accomplished that goal. we went for osama bin laden. we accomplished that goal. and now it is time. congressman ryan made very clear that governor romney has a very different view. although he says that he thinks we should get out in 2014, although he says that that makes sense, he says we should never have announced that and i might add, had not, the afghans would never step up, which should never have announced that and, when asked to guarantee you will get out, he says it depends. no, i'm serious. you heard it. it depends on the situation on the ground. it depends. well it depends on nothing other than the date as far as we're concerned. it is time for the afghans to take care of their own responsibilities. [applause] but like almost everything, it depends. it depends on which day you asking the question. [laughter] it depends. it depends on the circumstances. but it was not just on foreign policy
the department -- it's a part of defense. they are not enforcing with me to be doing. they claimed how great a system they have. the have a grid system on line but for people to physically go in and look for the ballot. that is great if they are internet savvy. by the time it hits people, it is too late, probably by september or october. in the civilian world, we can walk into a department of motor vehicles office or a social services office and we can even walk into recording station -- i've heard they have offered opportunities for people to vote. when you are on active duty in the military, there is no way to go unless they have those of us is set up. i don't mean an officer who has five other things to do. if they do collateral duty, it means they are not graded on performance of that extra duty. they need to allocate about money to get this accomplished which is a blatant dishonest statement. they have $75 million over the past three years allocated to them. $46 million a lot to get this set up in 2011 and they have managed to perfect their internet and voting? internet registration. th
of defense in a coordinated effort, in reconnaissance. but i don't believe that we are going to turn the department of defense into a police organization. we are using our military assets in a prudent way to deal with interdiction, and we've made some success in this area. seventy tons of cocaine have been stopped. but, you know, when you look at the drug problem and it is a tremendous problem, and there are no easy solutions to it it's a complicated problem, and it's heading up the effort to try to create a drug-free america, which is a challenge and a goal of all of us. not only will we utilize national defense and the department of defense, but we've got to get on the demand side of the ledger; we've got to get to education. and education ought to begin at home, and it ought to be reinforced in our schools. and there's another thing that will be more important than the premise of this question on a hypothetical of using troops. we will use the military assets, we will use military assets but we need to focus on another part of this problem, and that problem is law enforcement. and
year, the department of defense has been working closely with other agencies to understand where are the lines of responsibility when it comes to cyber defense? where do we draw those lines? how do those responsibilities get executed? as part of that effort, the department is now finalizing the most comprehensive change to our rules of engagement in cyberspace in seven years. the new rules will make clear that the department has a responsibility not only to be thin d.o.d.'s networks -- to networks, but to defend the nation and our natural -- national interests in cyberspace. these new rules makes the department more agile and provides us with the ability to confront major threats quickly. to execute these responsibilities, we must have strong organizational structures in place. three years ago, the department took a major step forward by establishing the united states cyber command. under the leadership of a four start officer who also served as the director of the national security agency, cyber command has matured into what i believe it is a world-class organization. it has the
in the middle east when our words are not backed up by deeds, when our defense spending is being deeply cut off, when we have no trade agenda to speak of, and the perception of our strategy is not one of partnership but of passivity. host: that was mitt romney yesterday. it garnered a headline in "usa today" -- how much of the speech was against president obama and what he's done and how much of it was laying on his own trajectory and agenda? guest: mostly in his role as a challenger, this is about a critique of the obama foreign- policy. that's a very common tactic by challengers. there were some good lines. he talked about hope is not a strategy. he's trying to emphasize his critique of obama as leading from behind, which was from an unnamed administration official at the end of a 8000 word new yorker magazine piece last year. it has become a staple of republican critics of the president's foreign-policy. there are some real differences between obama and romney when it comes to foreign policy. those are substantive. romney has called a rush of the -- called russia the number one geopolitical
suggested if we went off the fiscal cliff and have the spending cuts in defense, that it would kill jobs in virginia. >> but that's where you need leadership from the top. and successful governors do two things well. they provide leadership and they propose bold initiatives to their legislatures and they also have a strategy or a blueprint for economic growth in their state for the future. those are the successful governors. we need the same type of leadership in the white house. >> no president has had reorganization authority since ronald reagan lost in the 1980's, when it expired. i think there needs to come back. i would put back some type of entitlement authority that was lost after the nixon era. the subcommittees in congress are not very good managers of certain things. so there has to be a combination. you cannot leave the size and structure of the government we have in place. this government functions on a 19th century organization model despite the availability of 21st century technology. everybody is automating everything and it's very slow. you look at the demographics of the
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6